That and it pushes the EV market closer to the critical mass point where large scale deployment of charging stations becomes economically viable, thus ameliorating the largest barrier to buying and EV: range anxiety.
I'll take some blame, I up voted it on the firehose. I found it to be an interesting story, and while I didn't give any thought to the comments it would engender, there have been some interesting notes about Rio's current economic state.
I'm not entirely convinced that the number of net work hours will even decrease. It is an interesting experiment, and I will hypothesize that the results will be determined by the financial state of the person that started receiving the UBI. I think that the largest change in behavior will come from people in the middle to lower income levels. People with very little income level will most likely have most of the money consumed simply escaping debt, which is usually what has them locked into lower income levels while the middle class will see the most change.
I predict that most of the middle of the road people who show up for a paycheck will cut back on hours worked during the day while most of the 'doers' will increase their average time worked. I feel that with more security on the financial side the people who are more naturally inclined to take risks and push the envelope will lose the largest disincentive to making a startup in their financial insecurity in the event of failure. Thus I predict certain groups will end up working even more hours than they were before because many people today work for reasons other than a paycheck.
Regardless of number of hours worked I feel that this move will have significant upward pressure on wages. With people cutting back hours due to disinterest there will be a decrease in the supply of labor and most of all UBI gives every single person bargaining power in terms of salary. For people of all income levels having an income that gives you the time and luxury to find a good job with a good salary gives you tremendous advantage in salary negotiations, which, properly leveraged, can translate to salary increases even in what were traditionally minimum wage jobs. Who wants to slave behind a cash register for 8 dollars an hour when they aren't desperate to feed their kids?
In the end the question will be whether those that choose to make do with the basic income can be supported by the the ones that choose to work, but the idea can certainly generate benefit for everyone involved through increased wages and a decreased number of people who show up to fill a seat.
You've started to lose me with you analogy. The government encouraging people to choose career paths that earn money doesn't really smack of a prisoner's dilemma. In all honesty if you go to college in today's world without planning on getting a degree that earns you money then you are wasting your time and money.
Never in the Race to Begin With
on
Carly Is Out
·
· Score: 2
She was never really in the race to begin with. it is a common tactic during the early stages of an election to front a "mudslinging" candidate. Essentially a blood hound to attack the parties opponents in underhanded ways that would normally not be acceptable for a more mainstream candidate. After primaries start to reveal a party front runner the mudslinger backs out to avoid splitting the vote.
You are right and I am sorry for the underhanded jab in my previous post. However I feel that the hyperbole has started to go in the other direction concerning the job markets in STEM as of late. Math has been a core subject in schools for hundreds of years and has been miserable for everyone involved, at least in recent history. Despite being a core subject I don't believe there has ever been a time when there is a glut of skilled mathematicians and scientists which I would wager is mostly due to preference in the job market. Kids just rarely grow up wanting to solve complex equations.
There are other barriers to working in STEM than just a better high school education. Similar to other highly skilled positions such as medicine and law, engineering requires a lot of schooling, and a degree can be quite expensive. Cost has proven to be an effective barrier that keeps fields highly paid, but also has the detriment of ensuring that jobs remain in demand.
No one is suggesting this is case. Quite clearly I was stating that mathematics is a viable career choice from a pay perspective in the current market. Furthermore do you suggest that improvement in High School math programs will flood the market for professional statisticians? True mathematical modeling is complex stuff that isn't taught in High School. No one is coming to terk yer jerb.
Based on surveys conducted on graduated seniors at my University math majors were some of the most highly paid degrees in the entire place with starting salaries a year out in the six figures range. Most of them were people with advanced degrees in statistics and were employed creating models for investment on wall street.
This is the best argument that I heard as to why Apple refuses to make a 32 GB version of their iPhones. They know that 8-16 GBs is insufficient so they use it as an incentive to force people to upgrade to the 64 GB version paying a lot more money than the memory is worth.
This sentiment is reflected among the security professionals that I know. They believe that most cyber threat intelligence is bunk, and often ridicule it their spare time. But then again this is opsec. They ridicule everything.
How about as a bonus to subscribers mod points expire in more time? Unless I am willing to dump 15 mod points into a single discussion then I am rarely able to spend them all. It makes the process feel a little pointless. How bout a subscriber's mod points take a week or so to expire instead of a few days? That would be a value add for me.
I would NOT however give mod points based on subscriber status as that violates the principal that mod points should be distributed to the people who occupy the middle ground so as to encourage a more moderate discussion, and I am NOT advocating that the mod points should exceed the current 5-15 distribution. Armed with 15 mod points I can almost shape the entire discussion thread as is. If someone was able to accrue a large pile of points I shudder to think of the damage.
Having extra time on mod points would enable people to pay for convenience and time. It is something that I would spend money on if it were an option.
Nothing sounds off a debate faster than a Troll on Slashdot. The sheer number of people that pile on with well written comments denouncing and disproving wild assertions is what keeps the site a relevant place for discussion. No one here packs their bags for a subreddit that will massage their ego in an echo chamber.
This hits close but one of the targets is off the mark. It is colusion between the drug companies and the insurance providers that catches the hospitals in the middle. Every year the price of every drug goes up by 10-15% and the hospital can't do a damned thing except budget for more drug increases. What else can they do? Let their patients die? Because the drug and insurance companies sure as hell will throw a few patients over board to pressure the hospitals.
I think the thrust of the article was that the calories in food are not all usable so in terms of controlling a diet a calorie is not always a useful metric. In the case of that sentence -Eating food not calories- could be very true if we are considering eating 400 calories of a small sandwich and salad vs. 400 calories of pure sugar. In the case of the sugar you can be pretty sure to get very close to 100% efficiency in absorbing that energy as apposed to the general meal which is high in fiber and other non-digestible cell walls.
The thing is that this imprecise system of measurement should be helping people lose weight assuming they are accurately counting calories as it would mean they are absorbing less energy than what they think they are, not hurting people in their weight loss endeavors as the article implies.
I would recommend reading the article. For once they actually linked to an in depth discussion of the topic and the author cites a lot of useful information. For inctance, there is wild variance in calories based on whether or not the food you eat is completely cooked. Large pieces of meat can be potentially hundreds of less usable calories if prepared rare instead of well done.
It is this evidence that the article uses to criticize the calorie because a calorie is a measure of the absolute value of energy in the food you eat not the measurement of what the usable amount of energy is. Furthermore the article delves into how those calorie measurements are taken, and cites several pieces of evidence that those calorie amounts are highly inaccurate.
The article also disuses the role that gut bacteria play in our digestion, citing an example where a mother had gut bacteria transplanted from here obese daughter and gained 40 lbs without any change to diet an exercise. Thus diet and exercise are not the only influences of what we gain and how much. The article is littered with such evidence.
It is not just as simple as the food pyramid which, btw has been a broken model since its inception. Protein is supposed to occupy the lowest rung not carbohydrates and this has been well understood for years. Any doctor should be able to tell you that.
In the end I do understand where you are coming from. After all I am someone that lost 60+ lbs just by counting calories, but there are a lot of things that I could verify within the article based on my experiences. Such as continued unexplained weight loss even when I seemingly exceeded the maximum calories per day that I should have been eating. The article is definitely worth your time to read and even if you disagree with the assertion that the calorie is a broken method of measurement there is still a lot of useful information present.
The simpler solution that you are describing was the kind of system that was implemented prior to iOS 8. iOS devices have had encryption as long as I can remember but the implementation was changed into one that Apple could no longer access. Thus Apple did have access in another system now they don't. Ergo they spent development time and money to implement a solution that they could not access. Whatever your beef with Apple at least acknowledge that this is a positive step forward.
And it's not possible because Apple decided to implement a solution that made it impossible. We aren't having this discussion concerning any other smartphones.
It was the implication that something was wrong with what happened, that the concept of the 'Fireball' was somehow taken from another rather than having grown naturally out of the ideas of others and shared through the culture. On top of that nothing illegal or even immoral happened in the sharing of ideas that happened in exactly the way that it was supposed to.
The summary truly comes from the mistaken belief that everything everywhere is owned and created by one easily traceable person.
This is ridiculous. You can't patent game mechanics and you can't get copyright on something as general as 'Fireball'. This is how the sharing of ideas was intended to work not some illicit theft of ideas.
Hopefully it will give them time to make a good movie unlike that poorly directed poorly paced clusterfuck of a movie that spent all of the character development time ignoring the two new and interesting actors in favor of more overly long actions scenes and cameos with characters whose actors stopped giving a shit in 1980.
This issue has been debated for months if not years. If they don't understand the issues at this point it is because they are willfully ignorant of them. Stop giving these people the benefit of the doubt.
I would agree to this sentiment within the classes as the methods, but in terms of an overall enterprise application I think there is a lot of value in "going wide" so to speak.
In our application a lot of the cruft that built up was due to new services being built out at a fast pace within the framework of other code designed to do slightly different things for slightly different people. The result is that we have gigantic stacks of code trying to figure out what came from where and what it needs in return. We lost the concept of simple well defined methods that do one thing and do it well.
If I had the time to clean some of this up I would identify all of the most basic elements and start factoring them out of the code before making access methods that are distinct for every service that needs to use the back end. This would ensure less crossover of issues and minimize the impact of bugs while making the stack easier to follow based on where the information is coming from.
Slashdot Mirror
That and it pushes the EV market closer to the critical mass point where large scale deployment of charging stations becomes economically viable, thus ameliorating the largest barrier to buying and EV: range anxiety.
I'll take some blame, I up voted it on the firehose. I found it to be an interesting story, and while I didn't give any thought to the comments it would engender, there have been some interesting notes about Rio's current economic state.
I'm not entirely convinced that the number of net work hours will even decrease. It is an interesting experiment, and I will hypothesize that the results will be determined by the financial state of the person that started receiving the UBI. I think that the largest change in behavior will come from people in the middle to lower income levels. People with very little income level will most likely have most of the money consumed simply escaping debt, which is usually what has them locked into lower income levels while the middle class will see the most change.
I predict that most of the middle of the road people who show up for a paycheck will cut back on hours worked during the day while most of the 'doers' will increase their average time worked. I feel that with more security on the financial side the people who are more naturally inclined to take risks and push the envelope will lose the largest disincentive to making a startup in their financial insecurity in the event of failure. Thus I predict certain groups will end up working even more hours than they were before because many people today work for reasons other than a paycheck.
Regardless of number of hours worked I feel that this move will have significant upward pressure on wages. With people cutting back hours due to disinterest there will be a decrease in the supply of labor and most of all UBI gives every single person bargaining power in terms of salary. For people of all income levels having an income that gives you the time and luxury to find a good job with a good salary gives you tremendous advantage in salary negotiations, which, properly leveraged, can translate to salary increases even in what were traditionally minimum wage jobs. Who wants to slave behind a cash register for 8 dollars an hour when they aren't desperate to feed their kids?
In the end the question will be whether those that choose to make do with the basic income can be supported by the the ones that choose to work, but the idea can certainly generate benefit for everyone involved through increased wages and a decreased number of people who show up to fill a seat.
You've started to lose me with you analogy. The government encouraging people to choose career paths that earn money doesn't really smack of a prisoner's dilemma. In all honesty if you go to college in today's world without planning on getting a degree that earns you money then you are wasting your time and money.
She was never really in the race to begin with. it is a common tactic during the early stages of an election to front a "mudslinging" candidate. Essentially a blood hound to attack the parties opponents in underhanded ways that would normally not be acceptable for a more mainstream candidate. After primaries start to reveal a party front runner the mudslinger backs out to avoid splitting the vote.
You are right and I am sorry for the underhanded jab in my previous post. However I feel that the hyperbole has started to go in the other direction concerning the job markets in STEM as of late. Math has been a core subject in schools for hundreds of years and has been miserable for everyone involved, at least in recent history. Despite being a core subject I don't believe there has ever been a time when there is a glut of skilled mathematicians and scientists which I would wager is mostly due to preference in the job market. Kids just rarely grow up wanting to solve complex equations.
There are other barriers to working in STEM than just a better high school education. Similar to other highly skilled positions such as medicine and law, engineering requires a lot of schooling, and a degree can be quite expensive. Cost has proven to be an effective barrier that keeps fields highly paid, but also has the detriment of ensuring that jobs remain in demand.
No one is suggesting this is case. Quite clearly I was stating that mathematics is a viable career choice from a pay perspective in the current market. Furthermore do you suggest that improvement in High School math programs will flood the market for professional statisticians? True mathematical modeling is complex stuff that isn't taught in High School. No one is coming to terk yer jerb.
Based on surveys conducted on graduated seniors at my University math majors were some of the most highly paid degrees in the entire place with starting salaries a year out in the six figures range. Most of them were people with advanced degrees in statistics and were employed creating models for investment on wall street.
Replying to undo accidental downmod
This is the best argument that I heard as to why Apple refuses to make a 32 GB version of their iPhones. They know that 8-16 GBs is insufficient so they use it as an incentive to force people to upgrade to the 64 GB version paying a lot more money than the memory is worth.
This sentiment is reflected among the security professionals that I know. They believe that most cyber threat intelligence is bunk, and often ridicule it their spare time. But then again this is opsec. They ridicule everything.
How about as a bonus to subscribers mod points expire in more time? Unless I am willing to dump 15 mod points into a single discussion then I am rarely able to spend them all. It makes the process feel a little pointless. How bout a subscriber's mod points take a week or so to expire instead of a few days? That would be a value add for me.
I would NOT however give mod points based on subscriber status as that violates the principal that mod points should be distributed to the people who occupy the middle ground so as to encourage a more moderate discussion, and I am NOT advocating that the mod points should exceed the current 5-15 distribution. Armed with 15 mod points I can almost shape the entire discussion thread as is. If someone was able to accrue a large pile of points I shudder to think of the damage.
Having extra time on mod points would enable people to pay for convenience and time. It is something that I would spend money on if it were an option.
Nothing sounds off a debate faster than a Troll on Slashdot. The sheer number of people that pile on with well written comments denouncing and disproving wild assertions is what keeps the site a relevant place for discussion. No one here packs their bags for a subreddit that will massage their ego in an echo chamber.
This hits close but one of the targets is off the mark. It is colusion between the drug companies and the insurance providers that catches the hospitals in the middle. Every year the price of every drug goes up by 10-15% and the hospital can't do a damned thing except budget for more drug increases. What else can they do? Let their patients die? Because the drug and insurance companies sure as hell will throw a few patients over board to pressure the hospitals.
I think the thrust of the article was that the calories in food are not all usable so in terms of controlling a diet a calorie is not always a useful metric. In the case of that sentence -Eating food not calories- could be very true if we are considering eating 400 calories of a small sandwich and salad vs. 400 calories of pure sugar. In the case of the sugar you can be pretty sure to get very close to 100% efficiency in absorbing that energy as apposed to the general meal which is high in fiber and other non-digestible cell walls.
The thing is that this imprecise system of measurement should be helping people lose weight assuming they are accurately counting calories as it would mean they are absorbing less energy than what they think they are, not hurting people in their weight loss endeavors as the article implies.
I would recommend reading the article. For once they actually linked to an in depth discussion of the topic and the author cites a lot of useful information. For inctance, there is wild variance in calories based on whether or not the food you eat is completely cooked. Large pieces of meat can be potentially hundreds of less usable calories if prepared rare instead of well done.
It is this evidence that the article uses to criticize the calorie because a calorie is a measure of the absolute value of energy in the food you eat not the measurement of what the usable amount of energy is. Furthermore the article delves into how those calorie measurements are taken, and cites several pieces of evidence that those calorie amounts are highly inaccurate.
The article also disuses the role that gut bacteria play in our digestion, citing an example where a mother had gut bacteria transplanted from here obese daughter and gained 40 lbs without any change to diet an exercise. Thus diet and exercise are not the only influences of what we gain and how much. The article is littered with such evidence.
It is not just as simple as the food pyramid which, btw has been a broken model since its inception. Protein is supposed to occupy the lowest rung not carbohydrates and this has been well understood for years. Any doctor should be able to tell you that.
In the end I do understand where you are coming from. After all I am someone that lost 60+ lbs just by counting calories, but there are a lot of things that I could verify within the article based on my experiences. Such as continued unexplained weight loss even when I seemingly exceeded the maximum calories per day that I should have been eating. The article is definitely worth your time to read and even if you disagree with the assertion that the calorie is a broken method of measurement there is still a lot of useful information present.
The simpler solution that you are describing was the kind of system that was implemented prior to iOS 8. iOS devices have had encryption as long as I can remember but the implementation was changed into one that Apple could no longer access. Thus Apple did have access in another system now they don't. Ergo they spent development time and money to implement a solution that they could not access. Whatever your beef with Apple at least acknowledge that this is a positive step forward.
And it's not possible because Apple decided to implement a solution that made it impossible. We aren't having this discussion concerning any other smartphones.
1blocker can take care of most of the adds on you iOS device if you are interested.
It was the implication that something was wrong with what happened, that the concept of the 'Fireball' was somehow taken from another rather than having grown naturally out of the ideas of others and shared through the culture. On top of that nothing illegal or even immoral happened in the sharing of ideas that happened in exactly the way that it was supposed to.
The summary truly comes from the mistaken belief that everything everywhere is owned and created by one easily traceable person.
This is ridiculous. You can't patent game mechanics and you can't get copyright on something as general as 'Fireball'. This is how the sharing of ideas was intended to work not some illicit theft of ideas.
Hopefully it will give them time to make a good movie unlike that poorly directed poorly paced clusterfuck of a movie that spent all of the character development time ignoring the two new and interesting actors in favor of more overly long actions scenes and cameos with characters whose actors stopped giving a shit in 1980.
This issue has been debated for months if not years. If they don't understand the issues at this point it is because they are willfully ignorant of them. Stop giving these people the benefit of the doubt.
I would agree to this sentiment within the classes as the methods, but in terms of an overall enterprise application I think there is a lot of value in "going wide" so to speak.
In our application a lot of the cruft that built up was due to new services being built out at a fast pace within the framework of other code designed to do slightly different things for slightly different people. The result is that we have gigantic stacks of code trying to figure out what came from where and what it needs in return. We lost the concept of simple well defined methods that do one thing and do it well.
If I had the time to clean some of this up I would identify all of the most basic elements and start factoring them out of the code before making access methods that are distinct for every service that needs to use the back end. This would ensure less crossover of issues and minimize the impact of bugs while making the stack easier to follow based on where the information is coming from.
I hadn't seen the 2013 version until now. That fucking interface is vomit inducing.